Covering third parties and independent candidates since 2008

Menu

IPR’s 2016 Libertarian Party Presidential Preference Poll

The following is the first official Independent Political Report poll concerning the Libertarian Party’s 2016 presidential nomination.

The only individuals included in this poll are those who are either officially running for the Libertarian Party’s 2016 presidential nomination or have expressed interest in running for the Libertarian Party’s 2016 presidential nomination.

For more information on the individuals included, links to their respective campaign websites or wikipedia biographies are provided below:

I gave NOTA the #2 spot, but I want to include the proviso that a NOTA ticket should not mean a stand-down, but rather entail the LP filing slates of electors with “NONE OF THE ABOVE” on the top of the ticket, and litigating against any totalitarian states that refuse to put that ticket on the ballot.

We should have an option for “amend the Constitution to have the US ruled by a junta consisting of current and former members of the Rolling Stones, to be replaced as they die by random selection from among the performers and production staff who assisted them in recording Exile on Main Street.”

I voted by listing the names in order as I assumed the poll wanted but for the overall question I voted NOTA. No offense to any of the listed candidates but my number one choice was not listed. Therefore I went with NOTA for the last question.

I do want to point out that the Phillies site linked to was just a temporary one I created back in the Spring of 2006 until Seth Cohn got the official version released. We ran a much better campaign than that.

I trust you Trent, but there’s another IP that voted twice. If that individual wants to explain why two votes came from his IP, he can do so here or e-mail me. Otherwise, I will delete the latest vote.

Trent Hill said: “Judge Napolitano would be a VERY wise choice, as NF has pointed out.”

Andrew Napolitano would be the best choice mentioned so far, but who knows if he is even interested in seeking the LP nomination, or in running for President at all. He could be a great candidate if he were though.

Here’s a ticket I’d like to see for the LP in 2016: Andrew Napolitano for President and Jesse Ventura for Vice President.

Thomas Knapp, I saw the Stones in LA in 1972 (the first tour with Mick Taylor). I can’t believe anyone on these pages is old enough to really appreciate those times. Schmitz/Anderson, birth of the Libertarian Party, Watergate, McGovern, the Stones tour, John Lennon singing “Woman is the Nigger of the World” on the Dick Cavett Show. An interesting year…not by any means equal to 1968, but interesting nonetheless.

@32. Before voting Libertarian the balance of my life. I voted Schmitz/Anderson in 72. Heady dazes indeed. Kids today do not realize what they missed out on. Some good. Some not so good. We were going to change the world. Heady dazes indeed.

I mean, the easiest thing you could do with the part 2 data would probly be to just add up everything and say the guy with lowest score wins, like in golf. But one might give percentages of first choices, second choices, or the like with it.

I am sure that running a campaign for president would take away from time writing more books and presentations at future Porc Fests. Moreover I imagine a campaign could only stain his credibility as a historical truth teller. I vote against Thaddeus Russell for President.

Since Tom Blanton posted a video from a Led Zepplin cover band, here’s another one, this time an all female Led Zepplin cover band called Zepparella. This is Zepparella doing Led Zepplin’s version of “When The Levee Breaks”. I said Led Zepplin’s version because “When The Levee Breaks” is actually a cover of a blues song by Kansas Joe McCoy and Memphis Minnie from 1929 (I had to look this one up on Wikipedia). Anyway, here is Zepparella:

I agree Duensing should be on the list. The one advantage of a nobody candidate is his freedom to discuss important issues censored by the status quo establishment. 9/11 is the most fundamental liberty issue of the century. A nobody candidate who refuses to confront it is doubly useless!

As I expressed in the previous thread It would be interesting to see Jim Duensing run. From what I know of him he is a Passionate man when it comes to issues that people are afraid to bring up in the party. to quote from a previous posting “Duensing is unafraid to talk about 9/11 truth, and I’m pretty sure he’s criticized the Zionist lobby. Plus, he’s been involved in the Boston Tea Party, all pluses in my book. ” my votes would go to Duensing, Wrights,perry . Does anyone know if he has plans to run in 2016 ? The web site that was listed seems out dated or at least the picture .

@79… rather than just dropping that turd in the punchbowl would you care to expound on your statement? It’s really easy to say something negative but quite a bit more difficult to state a reason for your opinion.

@ Pendulum and Reality Watch – Thanks for the support. I have no plans to run for President in 2016, but haven’t ruled it out.

Politically, I am focused on a local run for Prosecutor in 2014. The website for that is not even up. Way too early to be talking about 16. This poll should be focusing on 14 LP Senators or something. Should I win that, it would pretty much take me out of any 2016 run as my term would be 4 years – and I’d need all that time to begin to clean up the justice system here locally.

BTW, you might be interested to know that I’m running a non-profit organization, Americans Against Pretended Offences, which is dedicated to eradicating the scourge of Pretended Offences from the Land of the Free. http://www.TrafficTicketsAreBullshit.com

We are helping to coordinate a Jury Rights Day Commemoration in Southern Nevada on Sep 5. Everyone should go to http://www.fija.org and check for an event in your county.

If we’re gonna already be talkin on national elections, we should be talkin 2014. But the fun of this kind of polling is in having more than just a few on the list to choose from. Are there any national elections or primaries comin up with a whole pack o contenders?

@88 Hey Mr. Watch. To do a top-two runoff, another vote, a top-two runoff vote, would hafta be held.
You will obviously get the plurality vote you’re looking for, Watch. Myself, I’m most interested in how all this’ll compare with the range vote that’s forthcoming.

@91 — Not really, not with all this data collected. You just see who the top two finishers are and then assign each vote depending on which of the two ranked higher in each voter’s preference.

(As opposed to an IRV result, which would be derived by eliminating one candidate at a time and recounting the votes after each round. Here you eliminate 14 candidates at once and calculate only once more.)